Penalty under Section 122 BGST Act upheld for wrongful input tax credit claims despite payment of differential amount

The Patna HC dismissed a writ petition challenging penalty u/s 122 of BGST Act for wrongful ITC claims. The assessee had claimed excess input tax credit, later paid the differential amount without interest u/s 50, which attracted penalty. The court distinguished the Price Waterhouse Coopers SC decision, noting it involved a "silly mistake" whereas here the assessee admitted the discrepancy and defaulted on tax payment. The HC held the penalty was properly levied as civil liability for failure to pay tax due on wrong ITC claims, rejecting reliance on CBIC circular meant for nascent GST regime difficulties.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Imposition of interest and penalty on the assessee for excess claim of input tax credit under the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
2. Availability of further remedy before the Tribunal not constituted under Section 109 of the BGST Act.
3. Discrepancies noticed during scrutiny of returns for the tax period July, 2017 to March, 2018.
4. Delay in filing the appeal before the first appellate authority and condonation of delay.
5. Applicability of the decision in Price Waterhouse Coopers Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-I, (2012) 11 SCC 316 regarding penalty imposition.

Summary:
The petitioner, an assessee under the BGST Act, challenged the interest and penalty imposed for an excess claim of input tax credit. The petitioner contended that no excess claim was made and had invoices to support the claim, citing a Circular by the Government of India. The Government Advocate argued that discrepancies were found during scrutiny, leading to the imposition of interest and penalty. The petitioner admitted discrepancies in input tax credit and turnover, paying the differential amount under coercion. The delay in filing the appeal was addressed, noting the limitations set by the Supreme Court. The Court found no coercion in the payment made by the assessee and upheld the penalty for non-payment of due tax and interest. The Circular relied upon by the petitioner was deemed inapplicable as the excess claim was admitted and rectified. The Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the penalty imposed on the assessee for the wrongful claim of input tax credit.

---